Agenda item

Extensions to existing ground floor and extensions to create first and second floor accommodation, including rear dormer window to provide 1 self contained residential dwelling at no.1A Grove Road, Mill End, Rickmansworth.

Recommendation: that planning permission is granted.

The application was for extensions to existing ground floor and extensions to create first and second floor accommodation, including rear dormer window to provide 1 self-contained residential dwelling at no.1A Grove Road, Mill End, Rickmansworth.

The Planning Officer reported that since publication of the agenda the Conservation Officer had advised that they had no objections.  The Conservation Officer did not consider that the development would impact on the setting of the nearby listed building, the Waterside, which was located on the opposite side of Uxbridge Road.

The Planning Officer also reported that one further objection had been received, which had referenced loss of light, concerns regarding access and the existing driveway, lack of dimensions on the plan, lack of detail on submitted drawings, noise and disturbance, loss of privacy, traffic concerns and impact on waste and drainage.  These issues had been raised in other objections and were addressed in full in the officer’s report.

Finally, the Planning Officer reported that paragraph 3.7 of the report required updating to reflect an amendment received during the course of the application.  This was that there would only be one space for commercial vehicles at the rear of the site and no provision for car parking for the residential use to the rear.

A local resident spoke against the proposal.

The agent spoke in favour of the proposal.

Points raised by the speaker against the proposal included: the harmful impact on neighbouring residents; concerns regarding congestion and increased vehicle movements; insufficient parking provision leading to overspill parking in surrounding streets affecting safety for local school children and access for existing residents; scale and design; loss of privacy; overlooking; reduced daylight; insufficient infrastructure and concern that the application was not for a genuine residential use, but to enable extended trading hours of the associated commercial property. 

Points raised by the speaker in favour of the proposal included: the proposal represented an efficient use of brownfield land, using space above an existing commercial unit to create a new high quality residential unit which was compliant with both local and national planning policies; the proposal incorporated various sustainable design principles and biodiversity improvements, including landscaping improvements to the frontage; the proposal introduced a new facade which would enhance the architectural character of the area; and consideration and been given in the design to ensure the development was not overbearing and did not overlook neighbouring properties.

In response to the points raised by the speaker against the proposal, the Planning Officer reported that the property was the only single storey unit on Grove Road and was sited in a mixed location.  When the building was increased in height it would not be any higher than the adjacent units and would not be out of context with the street scene.  The NPPF encouraged the efficient use of land above existing built forms, and so from this point of view it was considered to be acceptable in the officers’ view.  

In relation to the parking provision, the Planning Officer commented that the parking arrangements associated with the existing use would not change, with access via Uxbridge Road to a parking space the rear of the site.  The residential use would be a 2-bedroom unit which, in terms of policy, would generally require two off-street car parking spaces.  However, given the sustainable location of the site which was within walking distance to local shops and services, schools, and a doctor’s surgery on Uxbridge Road, officers considered that there were reasonable alternatives in terms of walking and cycling and that future occupiers would not necessarily be reliant on a private vehicle.  For these reasons, officers considered the proposal to be acceptable in terms of parking.  Additionally, there were double yellow lines which prevented parking outside the application site. 

With regard to the concern expressed about change of use, it was noted that some changes of use would not necessarily require planning permission.  In any event this would be a separate matter to the application before the Committee.

In relation to neighbouring amenity impact, it was acknowledged that the proposal would alter the outlook and potentially result in some loss of light affecting the flank windows at 1 Grove Road.  However, officers did not believe that living conditions would be sufficiently affected as to justify refusal on those grounds.  As the property was situated in an urban area there was inherently some overlooking between properties.  However, the spacing between the units and the absence of flank windows would, in the officers’ view, prevent an unacceptable impact.  A requirement that no further windows be added, except by grant of planning permission, would be conditioned.

Councillor Morris moved, and Councillor Smith seconded, that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

On being put to the vote this was carried, the voting being unanimous.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to conditions.